Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Horses in World War I/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Dabomb87 21:32, 8 April 2010 [1].

Horses in World War I

Horses in World War I (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): mynameinc (t|c) 19:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Featured article candidates/Horses in World War I/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Horses in World War I/archive2

I am nominating this for featured article because I feel that it addresses the subject completely and fully and meets the quality standards of a Featured Article. mynameinc (t|c) 19:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Has the primary contributor, Dana boomer, been consulted about this nomination? I don't see that you have any history in editing the article, and FAC doesn't typically take kind to drive-by noms. María (habla conmigo) 20:10, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I was thinking the same thing. I know Dana has plans to bring this article here eventually, but think she will do so when she's ready. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• There was a previous Peer Review, and all the points have been met, the best I can tell. I will withdraw, if that's better. Also, I thought the community would perceive 'drive-by noms' better, since it was by a third party who thinks it's ready, rather than a contributor. mynameinc (t|c) 20:51, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Read the large instruction box at the top of WP:FAC. – iridescent 20:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• (ec) Nope, see the top of the page: "Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FAC process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination." A withdrawal would be advisable, unless Dana feels the article is up to snuff. María (habla conmigo) 20:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn Dana doesn't think the article is ready. I apologize for the inconvenience. mynameinc (t|c) 21:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.